Did Second Temple contain Ark of Covenant?

[JurisPrudens]

Well, yeah, this sums it up.

I’m just curious. If the Ark had been stolen by Babylonians when they destroyed the First Temple, then what did the curtain conceal in the Second Temple?

 

[patrick457]

Well, yeah, this sums it up.

I’m just curious. If the Ark had been stolen by Babylonians when they destroyed the First Temple, then what did the curtain conceal in the Second Temple?

Nothing. The Holy of Holies was an empty room.* (Although the high priest apparently continued to perform rituals as if the Ark was still there.) The only thing that was inside was the bedrock on which the Ark would have rested, likely the ‘foundation stone’ (eben ha-shetiyah) that’s now inside the Dome of the Rock.

http://www.lifeintheholyland.com/images/Dome of the Rock, Rock from above, mat06136wr.jpg

• The first temple had these giant statues of cherubim + the Ark, but the second temple apparently didn’t have both. In fact, by the 1st century nobody knew what the cherubim looked like anymore.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Thank you for asking this question. I had forgotten the Ark was stolen from the First Temple. I had assumed it was there when the 2nd Temple was destroyed. I guess they didn’t try to make a replica. To me the loss of the Ark of the Covenant would have been worse than the loss of the Temple.

 

[commenter]

Thank you for asking this question. I had forgotten the Ark was stolen from the First Temple. I had assumed it was there when the 2nd Temple was destroyed. I guess they didn’t try to make a replica. To me the loss of the Ark of the Covenant would have been worse than the loss of the Temple.

It’s a fascinating story. I bet they could make a movie about it.

ok, forgiveness requested. But I think the Ark was stolen by the Philistines earlier, then returned to Israel. There are a number of theories about what did happen to it, and suggested locations where it might be today. This saga is similar to the Holy Grail.

Seriously, I think of it as pointing to the sacramental presence of God; sort of like the burning bush, God present in the Cloud leading the Israelites on, the Holy of Holies itself, and other things. These manifestations of God’s presence - in specific place and time - help remind us our faith should not be reduced to a debating society or museum, where “God” is kind a vague, formless idea.

 

[TimothyH]

The only thing that was inside was the bedrock on which the Ark would have rested, likely the ‘foundation stone’ (eben ha-shetiyah) that’s now inside the Dome of the Rock.

Hence Jesus’ words…

And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16:18)

-Tim-

 

[patrick457]

Thank you for asking this question. I had forgotten the Ark was stolen from the First Temple. I had assumed it was there when the 2nd Temple was destroyed. I guess they didn’t try to make a replica. To me the loss of the Ark of the Covenant would have been worse than the loss of the Temple.

The thing about the Ark is, while it really was an important artifact in the older parts of the Bible (Samuel-Kings; also Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, some of the Psalms), because it was God’s footstool-throne (hence a visible symbol of His presence) and a sort of mystical war palladium for the Israelites, when you get to Jeremiah, he prophesies about a day when the Ark will no longer be important:

And when you have multiplied and been fruitful in the land, in those days, declares the Lord, they shall no more say, “The ark of the covenant of the Lord.” It shall not come to mind or be remembered or missed; it shall not be made again. At that time Jerusalem shall be called the throne of the Lord, and all nations shall gather to it, to the presence of the Lord in Jerusalem, and they shall no more stubbornly follow their own evil heart. In those days the house of Judah shall join the house of Israel, and together they shall come from the land of the north to the land that I gave your fathers for a heritage. (3:15-18)

Even in Deuteronomy, the Ark was sort of ‘demythologized’. It doesn’t describe the making of the gold-plated Ark by Bezalel, with the lid and the cherubim and all that; instead, Moses makes a simple wooden chest. (10:1-5) Whereas in the other books of the Torah (Exodus, Numbers), the golden box was where God’s presence dwelt, and accordingly was a mystical artifact, the wooden box of Deuteronomy was a simple receptacle for the tablets, nothing more. (There’s also this slight difference in how God is portrayed: whereas in Exodus-Numbers, God’s presence is said to ‘dwell’ and manifest itself on the Ark and the Tabernacle (and later in the Temple), in Deuteronomy it’s slightly different; what is present is not so much God Himself (for he dwells in heaven), but His “Name.” Also, whereas in Exodus, there are times God is anthropomorphized and presented as sort of tangible (for example, Moses and the elders ‘see’ God in Sinai and eat in His presence; Moses sees God’s ‘back’; also the shekinah and the pillars of cloud and fire); in Deuteronomy, God is more abstract and distant: He clearly dwells in heaven and only manifests Himself to earth via say, His “Name” and the fire on the mountain.)

 

[StGerardMajella]

Thank you for asking this question. I had forgotten the Ark was stolen from the First Temple. I had assumed it was there when the 2nd Temple was destroyed. I guess they didn’t try to make a replica. To me the loss of the Ark of the Covenant would have been worse than the loss of the Temple.

"However, during the exile the Ark is safely in its hiding place deep within the ground, and its holiness is not affected in the slightest. Therefore, the holiness of the Temple is always present until this day since the Ark was not destroyed, but merely hidden.

When the Third Temple will be rebuilt, speedily in our days, the Ark will be taken out of its hiding place and restored to the Holy of Holies…"

http://www.chabadworld.net/page.asp?pageID={51F2C077-AA17-46C8-8760-7578CE8ED1AD}

 

[patrick457]

"However, during the exile the Ark is safely in its hiding place deep within the ground, and its holiness is not affected in the slightest. Therefore, the holiness of the Temple is always present until this day since the Ark was not destroyed, but merely hidden.

When the Third Temple will be rebuilt, speedily in our days, the Ark will be taken out of its hiding place and restored to the Holy of Holies…"

That’s one idea about the whereabouts of the Ark: it was buried deep within the Temple. Another story says that Jeremiah hid it somewhere at Mount Nebo (2 Maccabees 2). Yet another legend claims that it’s actually in Ethiopia. The Indiana Jones films would have us believe it’s in a warehouse in Area 51. Other people will say that it’s in Zimbabwe, in France, in Gordon’s Calvary, in the Dead Sea.

Yes, the loss of the Ark was a cause of concern for some Jews, since it made open the possibility that the second temple were somehow lesser in holiness than the first one. One way of coping with this was the stories about the Ark not being really lost or destroyed: it was simply hidden somewhere, to be found when the time is right. Don’t worry, they said, the temple in Jerusalem is still holy even without the Ark in it, because it still exists. The other way is to say that the Ark was ultimately a perishable item: a time will come when the Jews will ‘outgrow’ the box and no longer need it, because God will be with them via another way.

 

[Digitonomy]

Thank you for asking this question. I had forgotten the Ark was stolen from the First Temple. I had assumed it was there when the 2nd Temple was destroyed. I guess they didn’t try to make a replica.

Not sure about that…Somewhere I read (sorry no reference at the moment) that the alleged Ark in Ethiopia may actually be one of several copies that were made long ago.

 

[7_Sorrows]

The thing about the Ark is, while it really was an important artifact in the older parts of the Bible (Samuel-Kings; also Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, some of the Psalms), because it was God’s footstool-throne (hence a visible symbol of His presence) and a sort of mystical war palladium for the Israelites, when you get to Jeremiah, he prophesies about a day when the Ark will no longer be important:

And when you have multiplied and been fruitful in the land, in those days, declares the Lord, they shall no more say, “The ark of the covenant of the Lord.” It shall not come to mind or be remembered or missed; it shall not be made again. At that time Jerusalem shall be called the throne of the Lord, and all nations shall gather to it, to the presence of the Lord in Jerusalem, and they shall no more stubbornly follow their own evil heart. In those days the house of Judah shall join the house of Israel, and together they shall come from the land of the north to the land that I gave your fathers for a heritage. (3:15-18)

Even in Deuteronomy, the Ark was sort of ‘demythologized’. It doesn’t describe the making of the gold-plated Ark by Bezalel, with the lid and the cherubim and all that; instead, Moses makes a simple wooden chest. (10:1-5) Whereas in the other books of the Torah (Exodus, Numbers), the golden box was where God’s presence dwelt, and accordingly was a mystical artifact, the wooden box of Deuteronomy was a simple receptacle for the tablets, nothing more. (There’s also this slight difference in how God is portrayed: whereas in Exodus-Numbers, God’s presence is said to ‘dwell’ and manifest itself on the Ark and the Tabernacle (and later in the Temple), in Deuteronomy it’s slightly different; what is present is not so much God Himself (for he dwells in heaven), but His “Name.” Also, whereas in Exodus, there are times God is anthropomorphized and presented as sort of tangible (for example, Moses and the elders ‘see’ God in Sinai and eat in His presence; Moses sees God’s ‘back’; also the shekinah and the pillars of cloud and fire); in Deuteronomy, God is more abstract and distant: He clearly dwells in heaven and only manifests Himself to earth via say, His “Name” and the fire on the mountain.)

Thanks for the quote from Jeremiah.

 

[powerofk]

The thing about the Ark is, while it really was an important artifact in the older parts of the Bible (Samuel-Kings; also Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, some of the Psalms), because it was God’s footstool-throne (hence a visible symbol of His presence) and a sort of mystical war palladium for the Israelites, when you get to Jeremiah, he prophesies about a day when the Ark will no longer be important:

And when you have multiplied and been fruitful in the land, in those days, declares the Lord, they shall no more say, “The ark of the covenant of the Lord.” It shall not come to mind or be remembered or missed; it shall not be made again. At that time Jerusalem shall be called the throne of the Lord, and all nations shall gather to it, to the presence of the Lord in Jerusalem, and they shall no more stubbornly follow their own evil heart. In those days the house of Judah shall join the house of Israel, and together they shall come from the land of the north to the land that I gave your fathers for a heritage. (3:15-18)

Even in Deuteronomy, the Ark was sort of ‘demythologized’. It doesn’t describe the making of the gold-plated Ark by Bezalel, with the lid and the cherubim and all that; instead, Moses makes a simple wooden chest. (10:1-5) Whereas in the other books of the Torah (Exodus, Numbers), the golden box was where God’s presence dwelt, and accordingly was a mystical artifact, the wooden box of Deuteronomy was a simple receptacle for the tablets, nothing more. (There’s also this slight difference in how God is portrayed: whereas in Exodus-Numbers, God’s presence is said to ‘dwell’ and manifest itself on the Ark and the Tabernacle (and later in the Temple), in Deuteronomy it’s slightly different; what is present is not so much God Himself (for he dwells in heaven), but His “Name.” Also, whereas in Exodus, there are times God is anthropomorphized and presented as sort of tangible (for example, Moses and the elders ‘see’ God in Sinai and eat in His presence; Moses sees God’s ‘back’; also the shekinah and the pillars of cloud and fire); in Deuteronomy, God is more abstract and distant: He clearly dwells in heaven and only manifests Himself to earth via say, His “Name” and the fire on the mountain.)

Right. In fact, the Ark of the Covenant isn’t even mentioned after the days of Solomon. After it’s placed in the First Temple, it’s never heard of ever again. Before Solomon, the people saw the Ark, because it accompanied them in battle. After Solomon, the only people who saw the Ark were the high priests, and then only once each year. No one knows when the Ark disappeared, as the high priests obviously wouldn’t have mentioned the Ark missing. No one else knew that the Ark was missing until the destruction of the First Temple in 587 BC, when the Babylonians took away everything from the Temple - and the Ark wasn’t there. So there’s no knowing when the Ark disappeared, who took it, or why. It could have been removed during one of the Temple’s restorations (at least 3 restorations are mentioned in the Bible - by Joash, by Hezekiah, and by Josiah - more than likely, the Temple was restored more often than just 3 times). Or, the Ark could have been stolen by thieves or hidden away by priests who didn’t want it profaned by those who introduced idolatry into the Temple.

 

[patrick457]

Right. In fact, the Ark of the Covenant isn’t even mentioned after the days of Solomon. After it’s placed in the First Temple, it’s never heard of ever again. Before Solomon, the people saw the Ark, because it accompanied them in battle. After Solomon, the only people who saw the Ark were the high priests, and then only once each year.

And even then, the Ark was apparently covered in animal hide and a blue cloth whenever it was taken outside. So the Israelites only saw the box covered. (You wouldn’t get this impression from many artworks, where the artists often - mistakenly - show the Ark uncovered.) Nobody was to touch the Ark, except of course for the Levites who carried it, and nobody was to see the Ark when it was outside, not even the Levites who carried it.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

No one knows when the Ark disappeared, as the high priests obviously wouldn’t have mentioned the Ark missing. No one else knew that the Ark was missing until the destruction of the First Temple in 587 BC, when the Babylonians took away everything from the Temple - and the Ark wasn’t there. So there’s no knowing when the Ark disappeared, who took it, or why.

Cue in people who’ll say the Ark was a later fiction.

 

[steve53]

What happened to the Ark?

Hint: It was made of GOLD.

Very tempting- even for High Priests.

 

[patrick457]

What happened to the Ark?

Hint: It was made of GOLD.

Very tempting- even for High Priests.

If you take the version in Exodus, that is.

So what? The Ark’s gold was stripped off to pay some Judahite foreign debt?

 

[patrick457]

Not sure about that…Somewhere I read (sorry no reference at the moment) that the alleged Ark in Ethiopia may actually be one of several copies that were made long ago.

Even if the Ethiopian Ark was a copy, I doubt it would be an ancient Israelite (or even an Ethiopian Jewish) copy. See, the Israelites had a lot of sanctuaries. In Judah, the Jerusalem temple was the only authorized sanctuary, but on the popular level you had home altars and places of worship in other places held sacred (Bethel, Dan, Shechem, etc.) They either ignored or didn’t know the command that there is to be only one sanctuary for all Israel. The Ark was to Jerusalem what Jeroboam’s calves were to Bethel and Dan: that sanctuary’s cult object.

So I don’t know, it just seems to me that replicas of the Ark wouldn’t have been in high demand, given that the people were known to make their own images of God, either aniconically (depicting His steeds the cherubim or bulls/calves, His presence being implied indirectly), in an abstract/symbolic way (say, as the sun - sometimes winged, sometimes perched on a horse or bull - or a scarab, an Egyptian solar symbol) or in a direct way (as a man with the head of a bull a la Baal or as a man riding a bull or a horse).

 

[steve53]

If you take the version in Exodus, that is.

So what? The Ark’s gold was stripped off to pay some Judahite foreign debt?

So…it could have been stolen. Simple greed. A master heist that occurred 2600 years ago.

FWIW the face of the Second Temple- the inner sanctuary building- was gold-plated. To be taken off when needed.

The statue of Athena in the Parthenon was also gold-plated with removable plates should the city need the extra cash.

 

[patrick457]

So…it could have been stolen. Simple greed. A master heist that occurred 2600 years ago.

FWIW the face of the Second Temple- the inner sanctuary building- was gold-plated. To be taken off when needed.

The statue of Athena in the Parthenon was also gold-plated with removable plates should the city need the extra cash.

I don’t know. Even if we suppose that the Ark was destroyed to get the gold out of it (it was a wooden box overlaid with gold, supposedly - it is the lid that is pure gold), I’d doubt the motivation would be mere greed - somebody just wanted to have some extra cash.

See, David’s legitimacy was bound up with his role as caretaker of the Ark: the Ark was apparently seen as conferring the divine seal of approval to the Davidic dynasty. The reason why David and Solomon were too keen about the box is that they used it to legitimize their reign. (It was especially necessary for them: David, because he could be seen as an usurper who sneakily took the kingship from Saul’s line, and Solomon, because he was not the eldest son, and David had other sons who normally would have taken precedence.) Under normal circumstances I doubt the king of Judah would have allowed anyone, even the priests, to do anything to the Ark, because it’s the symbol of their divine right to rule.

2 Chronicles claims that the Ark still existed during the time of King Josiah (c. 649-609 BC), because the book claims that Josiah ordered the Ark to be returned to the temple. (35:3: “And he said to the Levites who taught all Israel and who were holy to the Lord, ‘Put the holy ark in the house which Solomon the son of David, king of Israel, built; you need no longer carry it upon your shoulders. Now serve the Lord your God and his people Israel.’”)

If that’s historical, that would mean that the possible time for the Ark to be lost would be limited to the last four kings of Judah: Jehoahaz (609 BC), Jehoiakim (609-598 BC), Jeconiah, Zedekiah.

I suggested the Ark being used to pay a foreign debt idea in a tongue-in-cheek way, but supposing that we’re gonna take that seriously, you could make some case for it. (Note: I’m not claiming this is what really happened, or even that this is what I think happened. This is just a ‘what if’-type of exercise.) For example, Jehoiakim. Jehoiakim ruled originally as a vassal of the Egyptians and paid a heavy tribute (one talent of gold and one hundred talents of silver): “He exacted the silver and the gold from the people of the land, from all according to their assessment, to give it to Pharaoh Neco.” (2 Kings 23:33-35)

But then, the Egyptians were defeated by the Babylonians at Carchemish in 605 BC and Nebuchadnezzar II laid siege to Jerusalem (604 BC). So Jehoiakim quickly changed sides and redirected his payment of tribute from Egypt to Babylon. He was a vassal of the Babylonians for three years; then, when their control of the area weakened (due to the Babylonians’ failure to conquer Egypt), Jehoiakim sided with the Egyptians again in 601 BC. This time, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem again (598 BC). Jehoiakim died during the siege (his body was thrown outside the city walls); he was succeeded by his son Jeconiah (aka Jehoiachin, December 9, 598-March 15/16, 597 BC), but Nebuchadnezzar deposed Jeconiah and installed Zedekiah (597-587/6 BC), Jehoiakim’s younger brother, as king in his place, again levying a tax on the city before leaving.

In the accession year Nebuchadnezzar went back again to the Hatti-land and until the month of Šabatunote [early 604] marched unopposed through the Hatti-land; in the month of Šabatu he took the heavy tribute of the Hatti-territory to Babylon.

…]

In the first year of Nebuchadnezzar [604/603] in the month of Simanunote he mustered his army and went to the Hatti-territory, he marched about unopposed in the Hatti-territory until the month of Kislîmu [end of 604]. All the kings of the Hatti-land came before him and he received their heavy tribute. He marched to the city of Aškelon and captured it in the month of Kislîmu. He captured its king and plundered it and carried off spoil from it. He turned the city into a mound and heaps of ruins and then in the month of Šabatunote he marched back to Babylon.

…]

In the seventh year [598/597], the month of Kislîmu, the king of Akkad mustered his troops, marched to the Hatti-land, and besieged the city of Judah and on the second day of the month of Addarunote he seized the city and captured the king = Jehoiachin]. He appointed there a king of his own choice = Zedekiah], received its heavy tribute and sent to Babylon. (Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle, Obv. 12-13, 15-20; Rev. 11-13)

Zedekiah would the last king of Judah before Jerusalem was destroyed for good in 587/6 BC.

So if you’re going to ask me, the Ark may have been lost, if not during one of the Babylonian sieges (used as payment for the tax imposed by Nebuchadnezzar?), then probably somewhere in Jehoiakim’s reign. Who knows? Maybe he did use the Ark for his payments of tribute to Egypt and Babylon. One guess is as good as another.

 

[patrick457]

So if you’re going to ask me, the Ark may have been lost, if not during one of the Babylonian sieges (used as payment for the tax imposed by Nebuchadnezzar?), then probably somewhere in Jehoiakim’s reign. Who knows? Maybe he did use the Ark for his payments of tribute to Egypt and Babylon. One guess is as good as another.

(598 BC) At that time the servants of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up to Jerusalem, and the city was besieged. And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to the city, while his servants were besieging it; and Jehoiachin the king of Judah gave himself up to the king of Babylon, himself, and his mother, and his servants, and his princes, and his palace officials. The king of Babylon took him prisoner in the eighth year of his reign, and carried off all the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king’s house, and cut in pieces all the vessels of gold in the temple of the LORD, which Solomon king of Israel had made, as the LORD had foretold. (2 Kings 24:10-13)

(587/6 BC) In the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month—which was the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon—Nebuzaradan, the captain of the bodyguard, a servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. And he burned the house of the LORD, and the king’s house and all the houses of Jerusalem; every great house he burned down. And all the army of the Chaldeans, who were with the captain of the guard, broke down the walls around Jerusalem. …] And the pillars of bronze that were in the house of the LORD, and the stands and the bronze sea that were in the house of the LORD, the Chaldeans broke in pieces, and carried the bronze to Babylon. And they took away the pots, and the shovels, and the snuffers, and the dishes for incense and all the vessels of bronze used in the temple service, the firepans also, and the bowls. What was of gold the captain of the guard took away as gold, and what was of silver, as silver. (25:8-10, 13-15)

2 Chronicles 36 also mention the taking of the temple vessels during the two sieges, but the Chronicler avoids mentioning (as the author of Kings does) that they were ‘cut in pieces’. “Nebuchadnezzar also carried part of the vessels of the house of the LORD to Babylon and put them in his palace in Babylon.” “And all the vessels of the house of God, great and small, and the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king and of his princes, all these he brought to Babylon.” When you go to the book of Ezra (1:7-11; 6:5, 8:27-28), the returning Exiles are claimed to bring (some of) the plundered utensils (mostly bowls, basins, censers and “other vessels”) back to Jerusalem. The Ark was apparently not one of them.

 

[steve53]

I would bet they had master thieves, charlatans, and frauds in those days- and in every era.

It is the nature of man.

Great movie idea- a heist film set in the ancient past, with the goal of stealing the Ark.

Either holding it for ransom or melting the gold down.

 

[patrick457]

Great movie idea- a heist film set in the ancient past, with the goal of stealing the Ark.

Either holding it for ransom or melting the gold down.

That’d be about as entertaining as Raiders of the Lost Ark and as historically accurate as Raiders of the Lost Ark. I hope the robber’s face doesn’t melt, though.